.50 GI: The Gentle Giant (That Can Kill You) [Multi-post review]

[cstarr3]

I wrote this a little over a year ago. I have posted it on Calguns.net and The High Road. Enjoy.

.50 GI: The Gentle Giant (That Can Kill You)

We have all heard of, known, met, or even are one of those .45 ACP guys who think that if you don’t shoot .45 ACP, then you might as well not own a gun. One of the common retorts to an inquiry into their choice of caliber is “I carry a .45 because they don’t make a .50.” Balls to that, because “they” do make a .50, and “they” is Guncrafter Industries.

The .50 GI (short for Guncrafter Industries, not for a US soldier), was designed to be used in the 20th century classic from John Moses Browning, the Model 1911. As the 1911 was designed in the day of lower power powders, they are not particularly apt at taking the high pressures and stiff recoil of modern rounds, though that doesn’t stop the competition shooters from chambering ye olde 1911 in 10mm or 9x23 Winchester. (Aside: try saying “lower power powder” ten times fast.) Because the gentlemen at Guncrafter wanted to use, but not abuse the 1911 platform, they had to keep the pressures comparable to the .45 ACP. Also, the overall cartridge length had to stay the same. Besides the pressure and overall length, they also kept the case head the same as the .45 ACP, making the .50 GI a rebated rim cartridge. I am not sure why they did this, but I expect it again had to do with shooting the round out of a platform designed for a .45 ACP. A quick Google search might answer this question for you, if you are really that interested.

Now, I have heard people make the following comparison, so I am going to try and head it off at the pass right here: If you are expecting the .50 GI to perform on par with the .500 Smith and Wesson, or even the .50 Action Express, I suggest you go take a cold shower. You are not going to squeeze magnum performance out of a low-pressure round that has a case 30% shorter than most common magnum revolver rounds. In fact, the overall length of the .50 GI (about 31mm or 1.22”) is not even as long as the case length of the .50 AE (about 33mm or 1.30”). So store the belly-aching that the .50 GI isn’t going to perform like the .50 AE; everybody knows that already, just like they know that the .45 ACP (or .45 Super, for that matter) isn’t going to perform as well as the .45 Winchester Magnum.

Now, about the platform for which the .50 GI was intended: Truth be told, I like the 1911 platform. Any 1911 I have ever shot has been fun to shoot, comfortable and accurate to boot. They also seem to have had more trips to the gun smith than my blind, diabetic father has had trips to the doctor. Having an Economics degree, I am well aware of the fact that there are always limited means to fulfill unlimited desires. Thus, despite my affection for the 1911s I have shot, I have forgone the $1,200 purchase of a quality dedicated forty-five and all the gun smith bills it might incur in order to be able to follow the dream I have of a multi-caliber Glock. Luckily for me, Guncrafter Industries has a complete Glock upper that can fit on both the Glock 21 and Glock 20 (regular and SF).

So, how much would a Glock .50 GI set you back? Consider $600 for the gun, and then another $600 for the upper. Yep, it is like buying a whole new Glock, but this new Glock comes with only one 9-round magazine (another magazine will cost you around $50). On top of that, your second Glock doesn’t come with a frame. But to compare apples to apples, a .50 GI in the 1911 platform is going to run you $3,200. The Guncrafter’s website says that their caliber conversion kit for a 1911 will only work with their M1, M2 or M3 pistols, so I think that getting an upper for your RIA 1911 might not work out. But if you wanted to give it a whirl, it will cost about $400. Even so, at that point, you will still have spent yourself into the same ballpark, around 75% of the cost, as the Glock .50 GI, but not nearly as much as buying a Guncrafter 1911 straight out. (By the way, I am to understand that Guncrafter Industries makes excellent 1911s. Some of the terms I have heard to describe them is “unparalleled,” “top dollar,” and “very nice.” That last description is faint praise.) All in all, if you want a .50 GI handgun, you can expect to pay at the least a grand for it.

[Aside: Did you see that little remark about the .50 GI compared to .50 caliber magnum rounds? Well, one of those magnum pistols will cost you better than $1,300 as well. Is the extra hundred bucks over the Glock worth it? Sure, if what you are looking for is an intense magnum handgun. But you can’t shoot .50 GI, .45 ACP, .460 Rowland, .40 Super, .400 Corbon, 10mm, 9x25 Dillon, .357 Sig, .40 S&W, .38 Super, 9x23 Winchester, and 9mm (literally a dozen calibers) all off of a single Desert Eagle frame. And that was what I was going for with my Glock project. So, please, once again, I don’t need someone to tell me that the .50 GI is not as powerful as .50 AE or .500 S&W or .460 S&W or .480 Ruger… If I was just going to get the biggest thing out there, I would get a .50 BMG (or .50 DTC, considering which side of the barbed wire I live on). Also, you CAN shoot .50 AE, .44 Magnum, and .357 Magnum off of a single Desert Eagle frame with a barrel and (for .357 Mag) a bolt swap. If you are lucky, you may be able to find the parts to make it shoot .41 Magnum. Maybe, time and money permitting, you could find some custom parts that will allow it to shoot .45 Win Mag, .327 Federal Magnum, .44 AutoMag, or any number of other magnum calibers that are out there. If you can do it, more power to you. You won’t hear me complaining about you spending your time and money that way, so please don’t criticize me for what I do. I have heard all the reasons why my hobby is way dumber than just buying the biggest gun on the shelf.]

So, back to price points: Currently, ammunition is sold exclusively by Guncrafter Industries. You can also buy components (the brass is made by Starline) and a Lee die set for the .50 GI, but that is also done exclusively through Guncrafter Industries. All things considered, it should not shock you that .50 GI ammo is pretty pricey. The ammo is sold in boxes of 20. The cheapest stuff, 300 grain flat-nosed full metal jacket, runs $25.52 per box ($1.26/round). Luckily, the price doesn’t jump too much when you go to hollow points; a box of these babies in a 275 grain variety will run you $26.75 per box, which is only about 7½ cents more expensive per round, or about 6% more. Not really that bad, compared to the hardball. Living in Kalifornistan? Want some lead free .50 GI? Prepare to fork over $2.11/round. Yes, yes, yes, a box of 20 solid copper hollow points, in either 185 grain or 230 grain, will cost $42.25. So, if you think buying a .50 GI is a little too expensive, then don’t worry, you might not be able to afford to shoot it, anyway. [Note: Since this was written, ammo price has increased to ~$30 per box of 20 hardball.]

Let us set all prices aside: I did buy a .50 GI, and I did shoot some .50 GI ammo. I called up Guncrafters and ordered 5 boxes of hollow points and 5 boxes of hardball on a Tuesday, and they arrived on the following Wednesday (the day before Thanksgiving). However, I received 10 boxes of hollow points, meaning that I was under-charged for what I got. I worked things out with Guncrafters to make sure that they were getting their money out of me (after all, when you have this much invested in the gun, you don’t want the only supplier of ammo to go bankrupt on your behalf). I simply made the same order, and they charge me accordingly, but this time they sent all FMJ. I placed the order on Monday; they were delivered on a Friday. So ordering ammunition is not a particularly daunting task, and delivery time is certainly acceptable.

The first day at the range I was prepared for a very mundane experience. The reviews quoted the .50 GI as having about as much recoil as the .45 ACP. One of the benefits of the .45 ACP is its relatively low recoil. Low recoil, high quality craftsmanship, and 40 rounds of hollow point ammo: I was ready to just go through the motions and report accordingly.

I loaded each magazine with 5 rounds. Each magazine I have has a capacity of 9, but they both have the +2 baseplate that is used for .45 or 10mm magazines. The +2 plate only accommodates one extra round over the standard magazine, which holds 8 rounds. That means Glock Magazines carry an amount comparable to a 1911 in .45 ACP without the +2 baseplate, or a Glock 37 (.45 GAP) with the +2 baseplate. Considering that the capacity is on par with handguns of a couple of .45 calibers, and that diameter of each .50 caliber bullet is 10.9% wider than the .451 caliber, which means a 23.5% larger hole, I think that the magazine capacity is adequate. Personally, I wouldn’t mind trying out a high capacity Glock 21 magazine converted to accept the .50 GI, which, according to my math, would hold something like 21 to 24 rounds.

Although I did not fire the gun with full magazines, I did fill a magazine to capacity and insert it into the magazine well before I went to the range. The tendency is for the magazine to bulge when filled to capacity. They bulge enough that a full magazine will not simply slip out of the magazine well. I have heard that this is due to tactical planning by Glock: Accidentally hitting the magazine release button will not mean that you magazine falls out of the gun, leaving you with only the round in the pipe to fight off a dozen bad guys. But what is hard to fall out is also more difficult to push in, and there is always the off chance that a magazine will not be fully inserted because of a combination of this bulge and a shooter not being completely aware of his/her firearm. The initial full magazine actually took a pretty good shove to lock it in. Of course, in a firefight, you won’t be shoving a magazine into a gun with a closed slide. So take the bulge in whatever way you choose.

Back to the range trip… I pushed the first 5-round-loaded magazine into the mag well, and leveled off. After preparing for nothing more than mild recoil, pulling the trigger created a bit of a shock. I got a kick that I would have expected out of a .357 Sig or Corbon’s (not Underwood’s) loadings of .400 Corbon. Perhaps I was just surprised by the recoil, but it seemed that the recoil was unusually heavy for a caliber that is billed as being a slow, heavy round. But I should have guessed that the .50 GI would have had comparatively stout recoil. These 275 grain projectiles, which are about 20% heavier than a normal .451 diameter, 230 grain bullets, are flying at velocities on par with commercial offerings of .45 ACP. Simple physics will tell you that 20% increased mass at the same velocity means 20% increased momentum, which also means that the gasses that are propelling this bullet are also pushing the gun rearwards towards the shooter, since the gasses have no preferred direction for pushing. This would translate into 20% more rearward momentum, i.e., 20% more recoil. I wouldn’t say, though, that there is a full 20% increase in felt recoil. Maybe 10% on my hand-wavy, [lack-of-]experience based kick-o-meter. But maybe I have just been shooting too much of that Underwood stuff. Maybe a .45 aficionado will disagree with me, on one side or the other of my estimate. When I returned to the range the following weekend, I had the 300 grain FMJs. The recoil was not as snappy, and was more of a hard shove than a one-inch punch. I think that this was better because I tended to anticipate the recoil less, allowing me to be more accurate. Speaking of accuracy… [continue in part 2]

 

[cstarr3]

[Part 2] I have written a few reviews, and each one describes my grouping “policy,” if you will. But if you haven’t read any of those, her ‘tis: The way I group shots is to simply record the largest hole-to-hole measurement on each target, using the farther edge of the hole (rounded up to the nearest ¼”). I usually shoot 50 rounds into 5-dot targets, giving each target 10 rounds (convenient, with the magazine capacity laws). Though not a statistically sound practice, I average 5 groups of 10 shots and round up to the nearest 0.1”. This little idiosyncratic way of grouping gives a result not overly different from other, more popular forms of measuring shot groups. For the .50 GI, I switched up a little and shot 8 rounds per target, as this meant I would shoot integral numbers of boxes, and not be left with a half of a box lying around (a pet peeve of mine). Note that a lower round count per group also means a higher potential for and greater likelihood of tighter groups, e.g., a one-round .50 GI group will always be a ½” group .

Out of my Glock, I shoot, on average, 3.28” groups. Out of both my Glock and the Glock’s nearest rival (and my other .45 ACP), the XD, I average groups at 3.27” with .45 ACP. Because I shoot so many different calibers, there is no single caliber for which I have vast amounts of data. All the .45 ACP I have data for amounts to 350 rounds, or 35 groups. Then again, this review is based on shooting only 80 rounds of .50 GI. Still, the .50 GI has grouping comparable to the .45 ACP. With the hollow points, I averaged 3” per group, and with the full metal jacket, I averaged 2.7”.

I would like to point out, for those interested, that Guncrafters is known for its quality firearms, and that quality should translate to the production of ammunition. As for the .45 ACP, I routinely shoot whatever the range or sporting goods store happens to have on hand. I believe that all but one gun I have ever used, and almost every round of ammunition I have ever shot has been more adequate in its function than I have been in acting as a shooter. Although I will not claim that my shooting is in any major way hindered or augmented by quality of gun and ammo, I will allow the reader to take such differences in ammunition quality into consideration for the sake of this comparison.

So, the average group amongst the 80 rounds I have shot in .50 GI is 2.85”, which is very accurate for me. This leads me to believe that either the .50 GI ammunition I used is so high quality that it compensates for shooter error, or the .50 GI Glock is just a well thought out and well executed system that allows for a high degree of accuracy. Considering that Guncrafter Industries seems to have their business revolving around this cartridge, I am going to opt for the latter explanation.

Because I sympathize with, and am slowly becoming a member of the ranks of reloaders, I like to add in a paragraph in every review to talk about how the gun throws the brass. Most of the brass wound up behind me, thrown several feet away from the firing line. This does not mean that no casing was ever lost to the other side of the line marked “do not cross,” but I was able to rescue 70 cases out of the 80 that I fired (87.5% reclamation rate). This is a plus, considering that brass fetches a price of 42 cents per case; more than the per-round price of some common calibers. The brass is ejected no farther than the .40 S&W, .357 Sig, or .45 ACP that I have shot in the past. This also speaks to the manageability of the recoil, even if it is not quite as mild as the .45 ACP.

Going back to the recoil, to beat the proverbial dead horse, it is not some soft, mellow, gentle shove that won’t have the same effect on you as an instant shot of double-caffeinated coffee. It will put a little hair on your chest, especially if you are part of the recoil-sensitive crowd. Maybe I developed a preconception after reading articles on the .50 GI that it was supposed to be some gentle, mild mannered client. But that preconception was shattered by the stopping power of a .50 caliber round. This giant can definitely put the hurt on an attacker, or even a shooter who is not quite paying attention to what he/she is doing. However, when compared to pretty much any other .50 caliber round (which are pretty much magnums), this is actually a very tame pistol. If you have shot and can manage .357 Sig, or even some of the mellower of the 10mm loadings, then you can definitely handle the .50 GI. It falls well within the sphere of manageable recoil cartridges for most average shooters.

In conclusion, I think that the .50 GI is like a Corvette. It is a fine car, and will outperform many standard American cars, even if it doesn’t bat with the heavy hitters like Ferrari, Lamborghini, and Bugatti. But you will pay for that extra muscle over the average American car, though not as much as you would for some Italian supercar. So here is how the analogy works: The .50 GI will hit harder than .45 ACP or .45 GAP, and certainly harder than a .40 S&W or a 9mm Luger, even if it is in no way on par with the .50 AE or .500 S&W Magnum in terms of energy. But the extra thump of the .50 GI over the more generic rounds will cost you, though not as much as the more commonly known and produced .50 AE and .500 S&W, which will still cost more per round than the monopolized, high quality, well produced .50 GI ammunition.

As for me, well, I have yet to come across a round I dislike on the whole. I certainly admit, some rounds have too much recoil to be much fun at the range, but would certainly stop a bad guy in his tracks. Others may lack the power to be used reliably in defense or hunting guns, but you could shoot buckets of the stuff without feeling any shock to the hands or arms (we all like shooting .22 LR, right?). For the most common rounds, like the 9mm or .45 ACP, they fall under that acceptable middle ground; a balance between shootability and capability. I feel as though the .50 GI dances at the edge of that middle ground, just off to the “defense” side. A 9mm shooter may find that it is a little too much, where a .44 Magnum shooter may find that it just isn’t quite enough. So I give this round a solid endorsement for those who wish to give it a try. But that begs the question: Who are those courageous souls, willing to give the .50 GI a chance?

Well, if you have the money for it, and you are the type to sacrifice capacity for larger caliber (i.e., the type that would likely carry an 8-round 1911 or a 10-round .45 GAP over a 15-round Glock 19) then the .50 GI is a legitimate contender for a spot on your hip when your plans for the day include being prepared for the possibility of doing some social work. But here’s the rub: Many people who fall into that category are devoted .45 ACP fans, and .45 ACP buffs like to tout the abundance and cost effectiveness of .45 ammunition in front of those who use less common .45 caliber rounds (.460 Rowland, .45 Super, .45 GAP). They credit it in a large part for being their ammunition of choice. In fact, many ACP über-fans are actually the greatest detractors of the .45 GAP. Because size and velocity are almost identical in the ACP and GAP, most ACP gurus fault the GAP for either the GAP guns having lower capacity than the ACP guns or the ammunition being unavailable at the local Wal-Mart. Both of these arguments can be applied to the .50 GI. (Aside: I’m not ****ting you on the Wal-Mart argument; look up any thread on the GAP round or the Glock 37/38/39 and you will find at least one, if not a dozen posts that read something like “GAP doesn’t do anything the ACP doesn’t do, it doesn’t have as large a capacity as the Glock 21/30, and I can’t buy .45 GAP at the local Wal-Mart.”) The most common response of ACP fans to being exposed to the GAP is that it is a solution in search of a problem. It is these kinds of reactions from the ACP crowd that make me think that the .50 GI may not appeal at all to the die-hard .45 ACP users. Of course, I am speaking specifically of that segment of .45 ACP shooters whose reaction to anything that circumvents their standard arguments for their preferred round being superior to all others (i.e., size) is one of beating their chest and flinging poo. So, what the .50 GI has going for it may actually be the reason it will never catch on; it is a big, heavy, slow round… and there is already a caliber for guys who want that.

Ultimately, I would exuberantly recommend this caliber to people who meet the following 3 qualifications:

1) they are a bit open minded on the subject of caliber, if not downright jubilant at the prospect of owning a new caliber;
2) they have the time and resources to order high-quality ammunition from a supplier that has a monopoly on this caliber;
3) they are looking for a big, giant meteorite with which they can crush bad guys, pummel wild pigs, or just make really big holes in pieces of paper at the local gun range, and;
4) They are recoil sensitive enough to shy away from magnum calibers.

For everybody else… well, if you have read this far, than either, on one end, you are a person with enough interest or curiosity about the .50 GI that you already decided that you may want to give it a try, or, on the other end, you are a person reading this because it is as close as you will ever really care to get to shooting it.

Addendum: This is probably one of the hardest reviews I have ever written on anything. Days after I wrote this, and after several weeks of thinking about it, the .50 GI concept still wasn’t falling into the categorical hyperbole that I frequently use. I just couldn’t find a hook for hanging the .50 GI. The .50 GI is certainly not mundane, but it lacks any particular thing that is enough to really give the round a distinct calling card. For example, the 9x25 is fast… really fast; the .40 Super is fast and loud and kicks and breaths fire et cetera; the .400 Corbon is the 10mm’s evil twin that uses an incredibly common brass for a platform; even the .45 GAP has its underdog allure.

I thought that maybe the .50 GI is on the extreme end of the slow-heavy/fast-light argument. But even that doesn’t really do much, considering the other .50 caliber rounds available all dodge that debate by being both large and fast. I thought that maybe the .50 GI is that sleeper agent that will snap at any moment and unleash hellfire and destruction on whatever is foolish enough to get in the way. But it has been around for a while, and doesn’t seem to be gaining much of an audience. But I realize now, upon reflection, that the .50 GI just… makes too much sense. It is a large round that can pack a severe wallop without being unmanageable. Can you easily handle .45 ACP? Then you can probably handle the .50 GI with only a little more effort. The only thing that doesn’t make this a run-off-the-mill caliber is its lack of commercial availability. I think I was wrong when I said it dances on the line between shootability and capability; I think it is certainly as legitimate a compromise as any commonly carried defense round. This is why I was having a problem. I wanted something incredible, grand, and exotic to mention. What I got was a pleasantly effective round. This is why I...

To use another car analogy: It would be like a car journalist going to do a review on a car made by some obscure European company, and instead of finding something like the Pagani Zonda awaiting his arrival, all he finds is a car that is reliable, useful, intuitive, comfortable, efficient, and just powerful enough most needs of mere mortals. What is this, a Camry in the rough, only more so, with a higher price tag? Such a car is not really going to inspire an auto journalist who just got off of an assignment of reviewing the next greatly coveted work of Italian automotive erotica. It probably wouldn’t even get much attention from readers, who will quickly turn to the pages with the fastest, biggest, quickest or strongest. So, really, my trouble is that the .50 GI is just not… superlative.

One other note: since I wrote this, I have shot a few boxes more. I find it to be more fun every time I shoot it. Just fun. Like shooting a good 1911 or a simple ol’ Glock 17, it is just a pleasure to pull the trigger and see the chunks of paper be pummeled off the target.

 

[leadcounsel]

What a coincidence - I just woke up today thinking I needed an .50 caliber handgun round to blow a few grand on!

Who are those courageous souls, willing to give the .50 GI a chance?

That's one adjective to use, but not the one that comes to mind.

if you have the money for it,

Well isn't that always the rub...

Ultimately, I would exuberantly recommend this caliber to people who meet the following 3 qualifications:

1) they are a bit open minded on the subject of caliber, if not downright jubilant at the prospect of owning a new caliber;
2) they have the time and resources to order high-quality ammunition from a supplier that has a monopoly on this caliber;
3) they are looking for a big, giant meteorite with which they can crush bad guys, pummel wild pigs, or just make really big holes in pieces of paper at the local gun range, and;
4) They are recoil sensitive enough to shy away from magnum calibers.

Hmmm... isn't this FOUR qualifications...?

Not so sure I'd fall into ANY of those categories... or the category of hemorrhaging money on a new platform from a company I've never heard of to shoot ammo that I've never heard of... keeping in mind that a SW 500 magnum is a $1000 revolver that shoots $1+ ammo per shot...

For those with endless budgets more like it. $2 PER ROUND http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/index.php/cName/pistol-ammo-50-gi

Appreciate the writeup... but not convinced this does ANYTHING that a handful of currently available guns and ammo selection can't do. If you really want a HOT fast and/or powerful handgun round there's 500 magnum, 454 Casul, 10mm, .357 Sig, 7.62 Tokarev, .44 magnum, .50 Beowulf, .50 Desert Eagle, .44 Desert Eagle...

In fact a quick look says this .50 GI in 230 grains underperforms 10mm 230 grain.
.50 GI - 230g, 1000 fps, 500-600 ft/lbs,
http://www.ammunitiontogo.com/produ...per-hollow-point-ammo/cName/pistol-ammo-50-gi
10mm double tap - 230g, 1120 fps, 641 ft/lbs
http://www.ballistics101.com/10mm.php

Heck, let's look at the lowly .40 caliber which costs 25-50% (less for training ammo, more for performance ammo) of the cost of this .50 GI ammo:
.40 Blazer (the cheap stuff) - 165g, 1050 fps, 400 ft/lbs.
.40 cal double tap - 200g, 1050 fps, 490 ft/lbs.
http://www.ballistics101.com/40_caliber_sw.php

As they say, an answer to a question that wasn't really asked (at least not by me).

Honestly - this is yet another quest for the magic bullet, failing to recognize that an affordable adequate handgun round along with TRAINING and SHOT PLACEMENT are the most important points. You'd have to be a hedgefund manager to afford shooting a few thousand rounds per month of .50 GI at $2 per round. Keeping in mind that for less, you could take a professional pistol course every month with an off-the-shelf 9mm or .40 or .45 caliber pistol with a huge pile of ammunition and shoot in monthly competitions and still come out ahead annually. You can buy 9mm ammo for .30 cents per round in bulk, and .40/45 for a little more.

 

[Nom de Forum]

.50 G.I. the cartridge so dumb it cannot be G.I. proofed.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I looked at the .50 GI when it came out years ago. I liked the idea of a bigger bullet, but you know, the ballistics were not impressive. The price was not reasonable. The cost of ammo was not reasonable at all! Now that it has been several years, let's look at all the manufacturers who have gotten on the .50 GI bandwagon to make offerings in the caliber...

{crickets}

You can buy a conversion for your Glock, but that is about it.

The ballistics have improved since it was offered and there are a few weights available up to 275 grains, which as a ball apparently will yield nearly 3 feet of penetration, which it a bit much for SD. It might be good for hunting, but I would choose another caliber and ammo for hunting. All of my hunting ammo is still cheaper than .50 GI ammo. http://www.brassfetcher.com/50GI/50 GI.htm

I appreciate the review, but this really isn't a round for "courageous" people. Sorry, but the machismo angle is just plain silly. The gun and the round is a commercial wildcat novelty round that just hasn't caught on and isn't likely to ever catch on. It has too much recoil for the typical self defense shooter and is too expensive to practice with. So this really isn't a fighting gun or caliber. At the cost of ammo, it is a very expensive plinker. It might be a reasonable hunting round, but most of us already have that otherwise covered.

So the .50 GI is like a Corvette? You are saying it has maintenance issues and is expensive to maintain, expensive to run, won't go off road back in the woods where the real fun is, and is apt to be recalled?
http://www.autonews.com/article/201...2-recalls-stop-sale-orders-for-2015-corvettes

It is a boutique gun and caliber.

Here is a previous discussion on why nobody really considers buying it...
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=668514&highlight=why+hasn't+the+.50+gi+caught+on?

 

[Thermactor]

Give that round to Johnny Rowland to work over!

 

[rswartsell]

delete

 

[Zaydok Allen]

A 9mm shooter may find that it is a little too much, where a .44 Magnum shooter may find that it just isn’t quite enough. So I give this round a solid endorsement for those who wish to give it a try. But that begs the question: Who are those courageous souls, willing to give the .50 GI a chance?

Isn't quite enough for/of what? People who care about firearms care about performance. I'm fairly certain anyone who shoots a 44 mag on a regular basis chooses that cartridge because of the ballistics and application, not because of the noise or recoil. I'm also fairly certain that if someone could make the same weight 44 bullet perform exactly the same with less recoil, 44 mag shooters would be happy. So I don't understand this statement.

I like all handguns for one reason or another and own ones chambered from 22lr, up to 460 mag. There is a point of diminishing return though on some cartridges and their intended use. The 50 GI is not intended for hunting, as is made clear in this write up. It is a self defense cartridge. So sorry, I'm going to take the classic and expected stance that I see no point to this round, and see nothing that it will accomplish that can't be accomplished with common commercial cartridges that cost a lot less.

Being willing to try the 50 GI does not mean you are courageous, it means your wallet is bigger than mine. I see no reason to invest in an expensive platform that shoots an expensive round, from a company I've only heard of in reference to this cartridge, that will do nothing better than my 45's, or my 357's.

It isn't a solution to a question nobody asked, but it is a solution to a problem that was solved a long time ago, at much lower expense.

Thanks for the write up, but the clear benefit of a heavier round is penetration. I see notes of accuracy, which is heavily based on the gun and the shooter. But this was a write up on the cartridge I thought. Where are the penetration tests? Where are the temporary and permanent cavitation measurements?

Finally,

We have all heard of, known, met, or even are one of those .45 ACP guys who think that if you don’t shoot .45 ACP, then you might as well not own a gun. One of the common retorts to an inquiry into their choice of caliber is “I carry a .45 because they don’t make a .50.” Balls to that, because “they” do make a .50, and “they” is Guncrafter Industries.

I am a 45 guy, and talk with many 45 guys on this forum. We definitely like our cartridge. However the statements about "They don't make a 50" are intended as jokes typically. 45 shooters are loyal to that cartridge for a few reasons.

The cartridge has been around for a long time, and as a result, ammo and different guns are available. If you like 45, you can always find a platform you like in that cartridge.

It has a proven track record. When looking at numbers of one shot stops in common defense calibers, it is right up there with .357 magnum.

The recoil is usually manageable to a lot of folks because it is a low pressure round combined with a heavy bullet. The 50 GI is also, but pushing a heavier bullet leads to more recoil, as is pointed out in this write up.

So what is that extra recoil getting you besides lower capacity? Considering a 45 will pass through a human body, or the body of an equivalent sized animal, I don't see how better penetration will help any. And if you are concerned about bigger critters, a good revolver, or the 50 AE is a better choice anyway.

I'm not saying the 50 GI is a bad round, and I'm not saying I wouldn't like to try it. I am saying though that the implied assertions in this write up give the impression that 45 shooters are luddites, hard headed, and inflexible. That is not the case in my experience.

It also implies that to give this cartridge a fair shake requires some sort of courage or bravery, when it does not. All it requires is enough money to do so. Most of us aren't going to see enough of a benefit in the performance of the cartridge to be willing to do so.

Show some real demonstrable and repeatable results with this cartridge, and demonstrate how it is superior to other cheaper and more available cartridges, and then I'll take a closer look.

Regards

 

[MachIVshooter]

One of the common retorts to an inquiry into their choice of caliber is “I carry a .45 because they don’t make a .50.”

The classic is "because they don't make a .46", but I digress...

I wholeheartedly agree with Double Naught Spy. The .50 GI falls short of existing rounds in virtually every category; from self defense to plinking to competition to hunting, there are simply better choices. Everything it is trying to do, the 10mm, .45 Super or .460 Rowland do better.

The only thing you get with the .51 GI is exclusivity. To some of us, performance matters more than bragging rights. And to me, spending too much money on something with lackluster performance is nothing to brag about at all.

 

[smalls]

The .50 GI falls short of existing rounds in virtually every category; from self defense to plinking to competition to hunting, there are simply better choices. Everything it is trying to do, the 10mm, .45 Super or .460 Rowland do better.

All while being cheaper, more available, and available in more choices of guns. I think it's an interesting round, but it ain't gonna be around in 5 years.

Wish i could get my hands on one of their 1911's, though.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

All while being cheaper, more available, and available in more choices of guns. I think it's an interesting round, but it ain't gonna be around in 5 years.

I think it will be around as long as Guncrafter is still in business. After all, it has been around since 2004 already. It will still be nothing more than a commercial, wildcat, boutique round and the gun will still be nothing more than a novelty in 5 years, just like today.

 

[Wreck-n-Crew]

460 Kodiak's response about sums up my whole view of the 50GI. So just a ditto will do i recon.

 

[cstarr3]

My editing is wanting; I did say three conditions, but put down four!

I see some great points made here in the responses, so I will answer them;

1) There seems to be a belief that I am asking people to give up .45, 9mm, or whatever they shoot, in order to spend vast amounts of money on .50 GI. Not so. If that was the case, I'd be something of a hypocrite, as I shoot plenty of .45 ACP myself (as well as 9mm and .40 S&W, and a *few* other calibers). Everybody likes .45 ACP. It has manageable recoil, and it is big and heavy enough (with sufficient velocity) to put the hurt on an attacker. Some people have other desires or obligations than going buck-wow on guns and exotic calibers. I would never support replacing .45 ACP with .50 GI, especially if it means significantly less range time due to cost, or if it means missing personal obligations. Personally, I probably would not have spent so much on the .50 GI if I had access to one through family or friends. But I didn't. Now that I have one, every one of my family members and friends can enjoy the occasional shot of .50 caliber, without risking a sprained wrist or a criminal charge (referencing the .50 BMG ban here in Kalifornistan). My blind father, who has had surgery for carpel tunnel syndrome, has been able to shoot a .50 caliber now, and has done so legally, without needing to go check his wrists out at the neurologist.

2) What does the the .50 GI do over the .45 ACP? Well, outside of 23% larger hole, pretty much nothing. In fact, I state that "what the .50 GI has going for it may actually be the reason it will never catch on; it is a big, heavy, slow round… and there is already a caliber for guys who want that." I was specifically speaking of the .45 ACP., a caliber shot by pretty much everybody. As to the .50 GI: Yes, it is fun. Yes, you should try it if you get the chance. Yes, you should buy it if you are looking for a novelty piece in your collection that can still occasionally act as a legitimate defense round. No, I don't think it will supplant the .45 ACP. No, I don't think it should supplant the .45 ACP. No, I don't think less of you if you don't have the same exuberant reaction to trying new guns and calibers as I do.

3) Soooo... apparently you guys aren't fans of hyperbole or facetiousness (wouldn't it be more correct as facetity?), so maybe using the term "courageous" was a poor choice of words. If it offends you, I apologize. I in no way meant that buying a particular caliber is somehow as brave an action as those taken by combat soldiers or firefighters in times of great peril. It is the same kind of sarcastic bravery that would be ascribed to somebody who decided to try my mothers home-made apple pie (a delicacy enjoyed almost exclusively by those who are still under the effects of Novocain).

4) I have nothing against .45 shooters. I shoot plenty of it myself. Most people like it, as do I. But there is a fanatical wing of shooters out there, one in 50 devoted .45 ACP users, as just a SWAG, who seem to believe that it is a cartridge designed by God Almighty, and imparted to John Moses Browning in an apocalyptic vision, and have dedicate themselves to the cartridge with a religious fervor. Unfortunately, because so many people appreciate the .45 ACP, there may be plenty of people who, mistakenly, tend to think I am singling them out when I talk about the unwashed .45 followers. As an anecdote, I was once at the gun range, and a shooter was there with his Kimber 1911, going stall to stall, trying to get the 9mm shooters to convert by offering them a couple of mags on his 1911... the door-to-door evangelist of the gun world. Now, I see nothing wrong with this gesture (just as I feel no hostility towards the ladies of the local JW church knocking at my door in the afternoon), and applaud him in his willingness to share his passion (and his very nice gun) with others. But I have never seen a dude with a P-08 or CZ-75 doing the same thing. Also, this act is magnanimous when compared to the up-turned noses that a few of the .45 crowd display to shooters of 9mm or .40 S&W (or other calibers). As another anecdote, when a brother of mine responded to an in-law that wasn't currently carrying .45, and that his carry piece of the moment was a .380, the response was a snort and "Why do you even carry a gun?" It is the latter, not the former, that I am speaking of. It is this extreme version of the .45 acolyte that I enjoy lampooning, because...

5) ...it goes back to the magic bullet. Although shot placement is everything, it certainly isn't everything. And this contradiction isn't a contradiction; it is simply pointing out that there are a few (very few) variables to take into consideration besides shot placement. But shot placement still reigns supreme. It is outside of this agreement on shot placement that caliber discussions usually take place, often in the "slow-and-heavy" vs. "small-and-fast" debate. And each side has its devotees and and extreme examples. The .50 GI is as much on the extreme of slow-and-heavy as 9x25mm Dillon (95 gr.) is on the extreme of light-and-fast. Most discussions will ultimately boil down to an agreement that shot placement is the supreme variable in round efficacy. Weather you are lauding the .50 GI or 9mm Luger, this is going to be somewhere in the responses. And I could just as easily say to a .45 aficionado that a .380 ACP (or 9mm Luger) put through a persons eye-socket will be more effective than a .45 round to the shoulder. I understand that there is no magic bullet, and if there was, the .50 GI wouldn't be a contender. In fact, anything short of a wrecking ball would have a hard time with fitting the magic bullet description. But as a legitimate defense round, it could easily be employed by most as effectively as .45 ACP.

The term I hear is "triple three," or "the rule of three," or something to that effect. Three shots, three seconds, three yards. This is what to expect in an altercation where a gun is required to defend yourself: The altercation usually lasts 3 seconds or less, with a total of 3 shots or less being fired, from a distance of three yards or less. If you can put 3 rounds into the bread basket from 3 yards away in 3 seconds, (assuming the round has adequate penetration), it can certainly qualify as a legitimate defense round. The .50 GI falls into that category for most people. But so do a dozen cheaper rounds.

So, the .50 GI is fun, even if expensive. But so is (for a far-fetched comparison) the .44 AMP. The difference is that the .50 GI can work as a defensive round, even in a concealed carry role, where the .44 AMP cannot. The 5.7x28 is an incredibly fun round, but is constantly pointed out as a little too petite for adequate defense capability (out of a handgun, at the very least). So the .50 GI can actually cross that threshold from novelty to practicality much more easily than many other rounds, and I was hoping to convey that to readers. I am sorry if you took it to mean that it deserves a place as King of Common Rounds, or that it is the only caliber that should be given shelf space at a gun/sporting goods store. And if what you got out of it was that I was prophesying some massive paradigm shift in the future over the .50 GI, I reference the portion that I wrote that "it has been around for a while, and doesn’t seem to be gaining much of an audience." The most common calibers are usually nothing-special calibers. They are an adequate compromises of things sought in pistol rounds (manageable recoil, adequate size and weight, adequate capacity, etc.). I think that the .50 GI falls along this "nothing-special" line as well. Again, the main reason it won't be picked up is that there is no superlative. Like the .45 ACP, 9mm, or .40 S&W, it is not the fastest, strongest, or heaviest. Heck, it isn't even the most expensive... my .460 S&W Mag costs more to feed. Every argument that can be had for its use as a defense round can also be used as a reason for leaving it alone. This is the reason I struggled with finding a hook for it. Cost aside, it makes as much sense as any other round for defense purposes. Nothing special in terms of... anything.

For those who took my review as invective, I apologize. I like reviewing exotic calibers because I personally enjoy them, and I don't see a lot of people doing much in the way of describing them. This does not mean that I don't enjoy popular calibers. Guns and calibers happen to be something of a hobby for me, beyond their use for defense or hunting. If my situation was different, I'd probably spend more money on other, more fun things: I would raft the Grand Canyon, or climb Mt. Whitney, and I would own fewer guns. Unfortunately, anything that takes more than a day of advanced planning has serious potential to interfere with my job, as I am on call all day, everyday. Even buying a gun, given the wait period, can be problematic (I had to re-apply for a background check on my most recent purchase because work took me out of state for more than the 30 days for which a background check is valid). So for me, exotic calibers are a way to enjoy guns beyond simple practice. I understand that most people don't see a need for most calibers (and VP Biden doesn't see a need for an AR-15). If it isn't your thing, well, just be glad that our country still allows us to own things that we don't necessarily "need."

 

[MachIVshooter]

It is quite clear, Cstarr, that you are a fan of disproportionately stubby big bore pistol rounds, and enjoy wordsmithing garrulous diatribes to justify their existence. It also seems that you harbor a particular animosity toward folks who have an affinity for the .45 ACP.

Is there a reason for either?

 

[Thermactor]

And how much holdover is there for a target at 50 yards with the 50 GI? do you have to raise the muzzle all the way up in the air?

 

[SDGlock23]

Obviously a few things work against the .50 GI. It's cool that it's a 50 cal handgun round, but the novelty of it and what I would call the impracticality of it hurts it big time.

Most consider the .45 slow enough, so something even SLOWER isn't a big selling point, honestly. The problem is that when you start comparing bullets of similar sectional density that unless the velocity is VERY slow, then recoil out of non-compensated guns would be too much, but in current form it isn't because velocity is really low.

.45 185gr = .50 225gr
.45 200gr = .50 245gr
.45 230gr = .50 285gr
.45 250gr = .50 310gr
.45 275gr = .50 340gr
.45 300gr = .50 370gr

I show those .45 bullet weights because I can load all of those in the .45 Super. I can run 185's up to 1600 fps (5" bbl) and 300's up to 1150 fps (5" bbl). For the .50 GI to sell, it has to run hotter than it does, it has to stand out. Currently it doesn't other than it being .50 cal.

Now if the .50 GI were loaded to higher pressures and muzzle brakes came into play, I'm sure it could be quite impressive. The .45 Super/460 Rowland can be very impressive but both require a compensator at upper end loads. Even still, there's a huge lack of .50 cal semi auto designed bullets on the market. If the .50 GI had the capability to, not so much mimic, but get within of say 75% the performance of the .50 AE then we would have something.

 

[cstarr3]

It is quite clear, Cstarr, that you are a fan of disproportionately stubby big bore pistol rounds, and enjoy wordsmithing garrulous diatribes to justify their existence. It also seems that you harbor a particular animosity toward folks who have an affinity for the .45 ACP.

Is there a reason for either?

I enjoy big stubby rounds, like the .50 GI and the .45 ACP. I also enjoy thin long rounds, like the 7.62 Tokarev and the 5.7x28mm FN. I enjoy big long rounds, like the .44 AMP and the .460 S&W Mag. I enjoy short thin rounds, like the .380 and the .22 LR. In fact, so long as it goes bang, I am more than willing to shoot it and share the experience. The long-winded circuitous writings are a way for me to enjoy the effort of sharing. If you don't enjoy them, I apologize, wholeheartedly. Correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't think there is any rule on this forum that you must read anything I post. Perhaps I could message you in the future with a warning that a post of mine is imminent, and you would then be able to not accidentally read it.

As far as justifying their existence, well... I don't justify anything. But that is mostly because I don't think gun-related items really need justification. I write because there might be someone out there who might either be entertained, or who is looking for something exotic. For whatever reason, novelty or need, if somebody wants to have something (or wants to not have it) that is good enough for me. The only people who feel they are entitled to a justification of the existence, ownership or possession of guns and ammunition are the Obamas and Pelosis of this world... and the rare smattering of the odd .45 ACP nut who seems to be brainwashed with the notion that shooting anything else defiles the sacred grounds of the local shooting range... or something. I never ask people to justify their ownership (or production) of anything gun related.

I don't harbor any animosity towards people just for shooting .45 ACP, or for having an affinity for .45 ACP. That would make me a hypocrite, as I shoot .45 ACP (and a couple of other .45 calibers), and enjoy it. It would also mean that I bear animosity towards pretty much every handgun shooter. I have met or have heard of plenty of people who shoot nothing but .45 ACP, and many have my complete respect. Most .45 ACP aficionados are pleasant, respectable, respectful and amicable people. So being a .45 ACP fan doesn't make you deserve my contempt. What does deserve contempt is scoffing at the use of other calibers, especially when the person using them has access to your caliber of choice. The few people I have met like this have all been "45-guys." Having an affinity for .45 ACP is not a sufficient condition for caliber chauvinism or exclusivism, but it is a necessary condition.

 

[cstarr3]

And how much holdover is there for a target at 50 yards with the 50 GI? do you have to raise the muzzle all the way up in the air?

I don't think it is that drastic. But if something is 50 yards away, I don't want to be shooting at it with a .50 GI (or a .45, .40, 9mm etc.). Give me a slug gun or a carbine or something.

But to answer your question: I think at 50 yards, you are looking at a little under a quarter second of flight time, which means it would drop just under three quarters of a foot, so aim 9-10 inches high (about 20 MOA).

 

[cstarr3]

Obviously a few things work against the .50 GI.

... For the .50 GI to sell, it has to run hotter than it does, it has to stand out. Currently it doesn't other than it being .50 cal.

Now if the .50 GI were loaded to higher pressures and muzzle brakes came into play, I'm sure it could be quite impressive. The .45 Super/460 Rowland can be very impressive but both require a compensator at upper end loads. Even still, there's a huge lack of .50 cal semi auto designed bullets on the market. If the .50 GI had the capability to, not so much mimic, but get within of say 75% the performance of the .50 AE then we would have something.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Like I stated, this round is nothing spectacular. It is this lack-luster performance that makes it possible for most people, and gun platforms, to handle it. But it also means that most people will not give it a second thought. So, what would make it capable of having a wide audience is the same thing that is going to make that audience ignore it. The opposite of this is the .40 Super: It is pretty hot, and does over the 10mm what the 10mm does over the .40 S&W (this is a bit of an exageration, but not too much of one). This increased capability, though, also means it kicks like a mule (at least when shooting Underwood loadings). Not many out there would buy a .40 Super of the shelf, even if the ammo was common and cheap. But back to the .50...

I actually posted an inquiry, on this forum, if anybody has heard of cutting down a Winchester Short Magnum to use as a 50 caliber wildcat. The only reply noted that the .50 Action Express looked a lot like a cut-down WSM. So maybe if someone made a .50 Auto Special or something out of the .50 AE, it could achieve better performance than the .50 GI. Also, the .45 ACP rim (shared by the .50 GI) and the .44 Mag rim (shared by the .50 AE) are not too dissimilar. However, length-wise it would still have to fit into a .45 ACP/10mm platform. I'm not certain if you could squeeze 75% of the .50 AE out of such a cartridge. But if it did, I'd probably be on the waiting list for a Glock conversion (because whatever gun it would be chambered in probably wouldn't be certified for sale here in the People's Republic of K alifornia).

[Interesting Note: try posting "K alifornia" without the space between the "K" and "a." All you get is **********. I think it is funny that that word is banned on this forum. But you can still write "California." How long until calling it "**********stan" is banned? Oh, I guess it already is.]

I think a fun, but certainly doomed gun would be a platform that shot something with an overall length halfway between a full-size .45 ACP-length cartridge (~32mm) and a full-blown magnum round (~40mm). Something with an OAL of, say, 36mm. Still short enough to grip and to function as a semi-auto; single stack for smaller hands like mine, but many could handle double stack mags. Given some scaled down magnum brass, they could probably handle some hot loads. Maybe a shortened version of the .50 AE, and even shortened versions of the .475 Wildey, .45 WinMag, .44 AMP, and 10mm Mag, and on top of that, some necked down version to satiate the speed demons out there. Even if there was poor reception of new calibers in this platform, it could still be used to shoot something like 7.62x25 Tokarev, which is a hell of a fun round. Oh well... I'm just musing. Look at me; salivating at the thought of an entire new crop of calibers.

 

[Rodentman]

I bought a Model 4 longslide 50GI last year. I like "unique" calibers and reload all my centerfire ammo. (including 5.7x28 and .22tcm). Owning and firing this gun, I see both sides of the debate. Fortunately I have worked hard enough to have the disposable income to buy firearms in this price range.

It really is a lot of fun.

 

[barnbwt]

"I actually posted an inquiry, on this forum, if anybody has heard of cutting down a Winchester Short Magnum to use as a 50 caliber wildcat."
510 Reedwhacker, look it up on weaponsguild if you are able. Not pistol-able, but fits AR mags as designed. Something similar and shorter could he done, but once you lose that one diameter of neck length, there is very little room for powder under the bullet in anything grip-able.

TCB

 

[cstarr3]

510 Reedwhacker, look it up on weaponsguild if you are able. Not pistol-able, but fits AR mags as designed. Something similar and shorter could he done, but once you lose that one diameter of neck length, there is very little room for powder under the bullet in anything grip-able.

TCB

Awesome! I am so glad I have found this out. It is not a pistol caliber, but at least it is *kind of* being done. I did find a couple of threads on various sites about the .510 RW. I did figure that as the case was cut down, it would get harder to shove a .50 bullet into the case and still have enough room for powder.

I guess there is always an alternative, like a .505 Gibbs cut and necked.

 

[orionengnr]

I had .50GI 1911 for about a year. Full sized, hard chromed, with both the .50 and .45acp barrels/mags.

Bought it used for a pretty good price. It came with some factory ammo, a set of dies, some once-fired brass, etc.

I shot it a few times, but I was losing brass at a greater rate than the OP was, and found that really annoying. I was paying more attention to where my brass was going than where my bullets were going.

I did not share the OP's findings regarding recoil. I thought the .50GI was a pussycat. But to be fair, most of my .45acp shooting is with either 3 or 4" alloy framed 1911s, so the steel .50 was nothing at all.

Bottom line: I ended up selling it for what I paid. It was a fun experience, and nothing lost. But aside from the novelty, there was nothing to keep my attention.

A harmless, enjoyable fling.

 

[barnbwt]

You think the 510 is crazy, wait till you see the modified AR15 bolts. No failures have been reported by any users (that's probably thousands of rounds of stuff approaching 50 Alaskan power levels) but the bolt face mods would probably pucker the rears of practically all readers, here (bolt face is blown out about .05" into the forward/non-structural portion of the locking lugs). To me, that kind of power from an AR15 is chilling.

Anyone try running sabot in the their GIs? Seems like that might be a way to alleviate some of the inherent inefficiency of solid projectiles that chubby (a little 45gr 22cal blown out with that much pressurized surface area would have to be well over 2000fps from even a short barrel --who cares if it tumbles immediately, it'll still be going 2kfps sideways when it hits downrange! )

TCB

 

[wc872]

I have enjoyed this thread very much. I am one of those 45 ACP guys. I have many handguns that were more powerful than the 45. I was intrigued by the 50 GI but could not find anyone that I knew with first hand knowledge of one. I now have a Model 3 Bobtail with the 45 ACP conversion kit. As of yet I have not fired with the conversion kit. My reason for getting the Model 3 is as follows. The book "Use Enough Gun" had a big effect on me as a young boy. I had been taught to shoot the biggest caliber that you can shoot accurately. While I have never been to Africa to hunt big game I have spoken with many Professional Hunters. None of them ever said that they requested a high velocity small caliber rifle when they had to go after anything that could/would eat/kill them. Everyone of them had a big bore rifle that they took when the prospect of harm was very real. I decided that I would get a 50 GI for those reasons. I have shoot hand loads & a limited number of factory carry ammo. I find that it is very well mannered. The recoil was less than I expected. I have absolutely no complaints with the pistol or the caliber. So I am very happy to carry & use the 50GI for home defense purposes.
Semper Fi